Female Zoos and Sample Bias

Nearly every article, academic or not, that I find on "zoophilia" or "bestiality" (because they're the same thing, right?) is quick to point out that sex with animals seems to be an almost entirely male phenomenon.

I know for a fact that a number of people reading this article will be raising their eyebrows, shaking their heads, and/or scowling, at least mentally.  The reason for this is often that they themselves are women.

So what's the deal?  Are these ladies outliers, little statistical blips in otherwise solid data?  Or is there something more?

In my personal experience - which cannot be used in research - female zoos are actually just as common as male zoos.  The trick to discovering this is to go on communities that are not specifically for zoophiles.  In being briefly open about my sexuality on a large online community, I received a lot of messages from people, many of which said, "Me too!" Roughly half of these individuals out of several dozen were female.  This in itself is bizarre, because in that community, only about a third of all users - zoosexual or not - were female.  This isn't the most scientific of ways of gathering data, but if we were to take it seriously, it would indicate that the majority of zoosexual individuals are female.

Let's look at another pseudo-statistic: On knotty.me, a non-pornographic forum I advertised a few weeks ago, at least two (possibly more) of the ten most active members are female.  So, fewer ladies, but still more than people tend to think exist.  We're getting closer to the source of the difference.

The simple fact is that not only do men tend to be on online communities more often than women, as evidenced by any "What is your gender?" poll you can find on an online forum, and not counting things like Facebook which are more gender-neutral, but they also tend to be far more often on online communities geared towards sexuality.  Men are more commonly visual sexual beings: we are more than twice as likely as women to view pornography on a regular basis, and so are probably more than twice as likely to find online communities and resources related to sexual activity.  These two facts are almost certainly responsible for a strong skew towards men in any study on paraphilias that use the internet as a source of participants, which is almost all of them.  It's very difficult to put an ad out on the street for pedophiles to call you or walk into your office, or approach random individuals in a shopping mall with clipboard in hand and the question, "Have you ever given your dog a blow job?" You get the idea.

And from that idea we get the other source of participants in studies on paraphilias, and the other bias: prisons.  One of the most commonly cited studies concerning zooerasty is a case study on a sex offender who also happened to rape animals.  People had no problem taking this to mean that it may be common for zooerasty to predict [other forms of] criminality.  The bias here is obvious, but prisons continue to be used as easy ways to get sample populations for studies on deviant behaviours of all kinds, and for one reason or another, prisons are primarily inhabited by men.  Just like with criminal pedophiles, despite the fact that women may make up a significant portion of sex offenders with a history of zooerasty, they are typically ignored by the academic community.

Once again, it always comes down to thinking about what you read.  Wonder about how the author got his or her information.  Look for similar conclusions reached in separate studies.  That goes for what you see here, too: I don't do professional research in this area because I'm aware that I have a very strong bias.

And for those lady animal lovers here: don't worry, you're not alone.  We have actually known this for a long time: in one study, out of 190 sexual fantasies of different women, 23 involved explicitly zooerotic activity. (Friday, 1973) Stay true to yourself.

For those who want more proof, there is actually a fellow zoo in the blogosphere who is female.  She's linked to ZP, so I'll link back to her here.  She does a bunch of stuff there and is quite a bit more personal and sexual than I am here, but if you're looking for other perspectives (or are into that sort of thing :P ) give Lexxi Stray a look.


Oh, and because these landmarks are important to me if to no one else: we just hit 5 000, er, hits.  It's to the point where I'm not even sure where they're coming from now, which is kind of too bad because I find that fascinating.  Oh well.  A big thanks once again to the readers, and especially the sharers!

The Anthrosexual Questionnaire

I came across again a piece titled, "The Language of Sex: The Heterosexual Questionnaire" by one M. Rochlin.  It made me giggle, so I thought I would adapt some of it for use here, as well as add a few of my own things.  1-18 are from the original questionnaire, which was obviously meant to highlight heterosexism, turning on their head a lot of questions that, at the time, were being asked of and about homosexuals.  Please note that, although it may seem like it sometimes on this blog, I'm not trying to pick on or appropriate the LGBT movement; I simply admire their ability to make an entire culture stop and think for a moment about their ideals pertaining to sexual morality.  I am also not trying to "convert" anyone to exclusive zoosexuality.  I do not even believe this is possible, nor, in our current cultural climate, is it particularly desirable.  I simply hope that you find this list entertaining and perhaps a little thought-provoking.

1. What do you think caused you to be attracted to men and/or women?
2. When and how did you decide you were only attracted to humans?
3. Is it possible that your anthrosexuality is just a phase you may grow out of?
4. Is it possible that your anthrosexuality stems from a neurotic fear of animals?
5. Is it possible that all you need is a good non-human lover?
6. If you've never slept with an animal, how do you know you won't prefer that?
7. Why do you insist on flaunting your sexual attraction to humans?  Can't you just be who you are and keep it quiet?
8. Why do anthrosexuals place so much emphasis on sex?
9. Why do anthrosexuals feel compelled to force others into their own lifestyle?
10. Nearly all child molestors are primarily anthrosexual.  Do you believe it's safe to expose children to anthrosexual people?
11. Men and women think very differently.  Can a hetero-anthrosexual relationship really work?
12. With all the societal support marriage receives, the divorce rate is spiraling.  Why are there so few stable relationships among anthrosexuals?
13. Disease transmission from animals to humans due to sexual activity is much lower than that between humans, due to the lack of cross-species STIs.  Is it really safe for someone to maintain an anthrosexual lifestyle and run the risk of disease and pregnancy?
14. How can you become a whole person if you limit yourself to compulsive, exclusive anthrosexuality?
15. Considering the menace of overpopulation, how could the human race survive if everyone were anthrosexual?
16. Could you trust an anthrosexual therapist to be objective?  Don't you feel he/she might be inclined to influence you in the direction of his/her own leanings?
17. Have you looked into methods, such as aversion therapy, that can be used to cure your anthrosexuality?
18. Do anthrosexuals hate animals?  Is that why they are anthrosexual?
19. How can you be certain that your human partner is consenting to sexual intercourse?
20. Humans fake enjoyment of sex with great frequency: 60% of women and 25% of men state that they have faked orgasm.  How likely do you feel it is that your human partner is not getting anything from your sexual relationship?
21. Are you attracted to humans because animals do not find you attractive?
22. If your partner does not explicitly say, "Yes, I want to have sex," it is rape.  Do you consider yourself a rapist?
23. Some people are, let's face it, pretty stupid.  Do you believe it would be wrong for you to have sex with an intellectually inferior individual?
24. With rape being this common in the human world -  one in four women are raped at least once in their lifetimes (Greenberg, Bruess, Haffner, 2000) - is it fair to say that humans do not have a real idea of sexual consent?
25. Do you think that, during a woman's "time of the month," she is capable of giving proper consent?
26. You can injure your human partner during sex: roughly one third of American adults being injured during intercourse every year (according to medical insurance companies).  Is having sex safe for both you and your partner?
27. Power differences are commonly large between human partners: many marriages include only one spouse who works to keep food on the table.  Is it wrong for such a couple to have sex with this power difference?
28. Humans are notoriously unconcerned about nature.  Don't you think it's better to become more intimate with the non-human world?
29. In South Carolina and Michigan, oral sex, even between heterosexual married couples, was illegal prior to 2003.  Do you feel that couples who practiced oral sex in these states prior to 2003 were perverts or criminals?
30. Anthrosexual intercourse is disgusting.  Why would you ever want to do it in the first place?

knotty.me

Over the last month, a new zoo community has sprung up that's quite different from the rest I've seen.  It is in its infancy, but I'm writing this post hoping that it continues on the distinguished road that has presented itself before it.  You can consider this a hearty recommendation.

A little while ago, I tore apart the zoo community, mostly that of Beastforum.  A little while before that, I also tore into EFA.  These communities, which have been prevalent at one point or another, have incurred my wrath for two separate reasons.  Beastforum is a junction of pornography and abusers.  EFA has done all the wrong things in trying to accomplish its mission to achieve zoo rights.  Both communities, along with the admittedly better ZoophilesForum and every other zoophilic community out there that I have seen, are also victims to the internet imbecile, who is shockingly common and makes that guy you heard rambling about grocery stores and government conspiracies on public transit seem calm and enlightened.

On the other hand, knotty.me is a new and small community so far entirely made up of insightful and romantic zoophiles, despite its name (which was chosen because it originally was going to be a porn site, but things changed and it was realized that there is a high demand for a site that is explicitly non-explicit).  I've barely even seen a typo there, let alone a statement that makes me want to throttle someone.  Porn is without exception outlawed; if it's something someone might conceivably masturbate to, you won't find it here.  Instead, you will find discussions on animals, support, news, and places to exchange experiences and advice regarding being an individual in one of the world's most despised minority groups.  Not to mention that the people there are genuinely friendly and supportive.  It's young yet, but in the month since its formation, and with nearly 100 registered users (and a high of 20 on at one time) there has yet to be anything even reminiscent of online drama.  And should there ever be, I feel the administrator is quite adept at managing not only the forum's software, data, and your privacy which is stringently kept, but also the community aspect of the forum.

So, if you're one of the many who have been groaning at the fact that everywhere you go on the internet that advertises itself as a 'zoophilic' community is full of idiots and genitals, and you would give anything for some pleasant, clean, and intelligent conversation with some friendly fellow zoos - or maybe you're reading this and just wondering if there are zoophiles out there besides me who are funny, clever, and incredibly handsome - you should definitely give knotty.me a look.  And maybe, if the forum continues to thrive, we'll eventually get that much-needed name-change.

http://forum.knotty.me